Bust Éireann

Idbatterim

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

This is a person working for BE.

The real nonsense of course is that BE costs are way out of shape and the taxpayer is expected to grin and bear it, to keep the Unions and staff 'on side'

Exactly. Run away public pay increases is one of the things that ruined this country.

TheQuietFella

Idbatterim wrote: »

Exactly. Run away public pay increases is one of the things that ruined this country.

I wonder will your sentiment be the same when they come after your salary?

ThisRegard

TheQuietFella wrote: »

I wonder will your sentiment be the same when they come after your salary?

A hell of a lot of private sector workers are either been shown the door, pay freezes, pay cuts or had to change their practices on a daily basis when their company hits a rough patch.

Yourself isit

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Because you don't have people in sections of society working in ordinary jobs getting middle class wages. In most of Europe they understand that a bus driver cannot earn 60k/ year for driving a bus on what in european term is a short haul drive. On one hand we have union environmentalist on about public transport but ingnoring it cost versus the taxpayer capibility to fund such services. If we want to develop a public transport system we have to accept that workers in such a system cannot be paid above market rates. We cannot have people earning 50k+ and skiving off or hogging buses to achieve a higher than normal living standard.

That has nothing to do with my statement about competition law. Competition law nowhere in the world concerns itself with wages.

Idbatterim

My situation is about as different as you could get to a BE driver. Look, they won't see it like this, but it's more a reality check. All the previous years losses, where normally salary would be cut, they were still overpaid. Id be saying "well that was a good ride" rather than "woe me"

devnull

gbob wrote: »

I'm a senior driver at BE, my daily driving time is 8 hours for which I get paid 8hrs 40mins. I work extremely unsociable hours and every Saturday for which I receive zero additional compensation. My salary is 39k inclusive.

Whilst what you say may or may not be true, the figures that you claim you are getting are clearly not in line with a very large percentage of driving staff within the organisation who are earning significantly more money for less work.

It has been proven that on average staff are getting 45k and a document with full details was distributed at the LRC showed that a large number of senior drivers were earning over 60k

Many of the routes that BE provide are incorrectly described as express when they are in fact glorified PSO services which should be reclassified and funded accordingly.

If BE feels this way it can un-register the routes and if there is no other operator currently serving them as a commercial route also, the regulator will have no choice but to put them out to PSO tender. This has happened in the past and will happen again.

The regulator has said this on a number of occasions and is now at the stage where the CEO is having to write to newspaper editors and people in the media and figures who continue to state this won't happen to correct their misinformation.

What the regulator does not want to do is to essentially reclassify commercial licenses as PSO licenses, to bail out BE management who have not developed their services when the competition have so BE can then use taxpayer funded money on a corridor to flush out privates which will stifle innovation in the sector.

BE should however, completely abandon the express market and concentrate purely on the PSO routes which was the very reason for their creation.

And if this was to happen, I believe that whilst there would still be short term pain and a re-org in the company and a restructure, there would be long term gain because it is the commercial arm which is contributing and causing almost the problems, if you take that out there would be a number of jobs lost, however the end result would be a much more stable business. But I can't see it happening.

devnull

ThisRegard wrote: »

A hell of a lot of private sector workers are either been shown the door, pay freezes, pay cuts or had to change their practices on a daily basis when their company hits a rough patch.

Difference is if a private company is losing money and in fear of insolvency if people do not take cuts or changes to terms and conditions they go to the wall, lose their job and join the dole queue a few weeks later.

Trouble with a public company is the staff know that in a lot of cases the state will bail them out however bad it gets and they use this as a bargaining chip in the whole affair to extract even higher wages or stop pay cuts.

n97 mini

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

There are private operators on school routes. BE just haven't given up the routes that they service. Not a whole lot of money in it anyway so I doubt private operators are salivating thinking about BEs school routes.

BE manage all school routes for the Dept of Education, even if they are subcontracted.

devnull

NTA Statement
https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/no-rural-communities-will-left-behind/

No rural communities will be left behind

Introductory Statement from Anne Graham, Chief Executive Officer, National Transport Authority to the Oireachtas Transport Committee 22nd February 2017

Chairperson and members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to attend. I understand that the Committee wishes to focus upon the financial situation in Bus Éireann and the rural transport programme. To assist me in dealing with your subsequent questions I am joined by Tim Gaston, Director of Public Transport Services with the Authority.

Before dealing with the specific areas of focus, I would like to set the context by providing a brief overview of the remit of the Authority in this provision of public transport services.

Remit of the Authority
The remit of the National Transport Authority is to regulate and develop the provision of integrated public transport services (bus, rail, light rail and taxi) by public and private operators in the State, to secure the development and implementation of an integrated transport system within the Greater Dublin Area, and to contribute to the effective integration of transport and land use planning across the State.

In addition to its statutory responsibilities, the Authority has various arrangements with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport to discharge functions on its behalf. This includes the assignment of responsibility to the Authority for integrated local and rural transport, including provision of the Rural Transport Programme.

Responsibilities of the Authority with regard to public bus services provision
The Authority is responsible for securing the provision of public bus services through two specified mechanisms:

public service contracts, where services cannot be provided on a commercial basis, and
the licensing of public bus services, which are operated on a commercial basis.
In licensing commercial bus services, it is important to note that the relevant legislation (the Public Transport Regulation Act 2009) requires the Authority to seek to achieve, in the public interest, regulated competition in the provision of such services.

I would like to now deal with the specific areas of focus raised by the committee.

Financial position of Bus Éireann
Bus Éireann finds itself in a very difficult position financially caused by losses related to its commercial Expressway business. It should be noted The NTA has fully renumerated Bus Éireann for the services that it operates under the Direct Award Contract with the Authority since December 2009.

The National Transport Authority (NTA) rejects the suggestions that the granting of commercial licences to bus operators has been solely to blame for the difficulties being experienced by Bus Éireann. The notion that there is saturation on the inter-city corridors served by Expressway services, and that the NTA grants licences to operators at the drop of a hat, also does not stand up to scrutiny. In fact since 2011, we have rejected almost as many applications for licences on these key routes, as we have granted.

Our primary responsibility in law is to the travelling public, and when we assess an application for a commercial licence, we do so with them in mind. It has consistently been the case that where new licences are issued in these markets, that overall passenger numbers have increased, in many cases, very significantly. For example, between 2012 and 2015, total bus passenger numbers on the Cork Dublin Corridor increased by 61 per cent, while on the Limerick Dublin Corridor, they increased by 50 per cent. In other words, rather than saturating the market, what we have actually done is increase public transport capacity, and in so doing enabled many more journeys to be undertaken on the bus network.

Bus Éireann commercial services like Expressway, account for only 19 per cent of all the company’s passengers. 81 per cent of Bus Éireann passengers are on routes subsidised under the Public Service Obligation (PSO) Contract that the company has entered with NTA. This will not change, and these services are under no threat. In fact they have been a huge success story in recent years, with passenger numbers continuing to increase. Last month the NTA published passenger figures for 2016, which indicated a 5.5 per cent increase in passengers on Bus Éireann subsidised services, jumping from 30.2m in 2015 to 32m last year. Subvention for these services by the NTA to Bus Éireann increased from €34m in 2014, to €40m in 2016. And that figure is likely to go up again in 2017.

Rural Transport Programme – “Local Link”
The objective of the Rural Transport Programme is to provide a good quality nationwide community based public transport system in rural Ireland which responds to local needs. In 2016, funding of €11.9 million was provided through the Authority for the programme with an additional €1.5m provided by the Department of Social Protection under the Free Travel Scheme.

Since assuming responsibility for the programme in 2012, we have focussed on restructuring the programme to provide greater efficiency and effectiveness in the service delivery. The restructuring programme included the establishment of 17 Locallink offices which replaced the 35 Rural Transport groups previously managing the programme. Local passenger services are managed by the relevant Locallink office in each area on behalf of the Authority. This restructuring has positioned the programme to better integrate with other public transport services, and provides a solid base to expand or adapt services to meet current and future identified needs.

Now that the organisational restructuring has been completed, we are focussed on optimising the services provided, within the funding envelope available. A review of services is currently in progress to ensure that they are meeting the needs of local families in rural areas.

Expansion of Rural Transport Services
It is very evident that there are gaps in the provision of rural transport services across the state. Locallink offices are working closely with local authorities and local communities on the assessment of local transport needs, including the needs of those that are socially excluded. Locallink offices are the NTA’s eyes and ears in rural Ireland, and working together, I believe we can make real progress in improving local public transport services.

Twenty-one new regular commuter bus services have been secured in the network in 2016. Regular 5/6/7 day per week bus services have been introduced following considerable development work by the Authority and the relevant offices in Counties Cavan-Monaghan, Meath, Kerry, Waterford, Wexford and Sligo-Leitrim-Roscommon.

In 2017 the Authority will continue to identify improvements in existing services and developing appropriate new routes based on the budget of €15.9m (includes €1.5m from Department of Social Protection). Over 40 new additional rural transport services are currently being examined by the Authority to be delivered across the State this year. Key features of the developments include greater integration with existing public transport services and better linkage of services between and within towns and villages.

Review of Direct Award Contracted services
The Authority is continually working with Bus Éireann to provide improvements on its contracted services and is now looking at expansion of those services now that the budget for public service obligations has increased since 2016. Kerry and Mayo are two of the counties that have seen service improvements. The Authority also promoted the improvements in the regional cities which have seen phenomenal growth in passenger numbers. Improved town services have also been delivered in Athlone following the success of the Sligo bus services enhancements.

Response to changes in Expressway services
If it is the case that some Expressway services are discontinued at local level, NTA will, as our track record proves, step in and ensure that local demands for public transport are met. When Expressway Route 5 was terminated and Expressway Route 7 was curtailed, the Authority put a number of services in place by extending some existing Bus Éireann PSO services and by tendering new PSO services and new Locallink services. If there are any changes to Expressway services, we will carry out a similar assessment and not leave any rural communities behind.

Snickers Man

Are they seriously thinking of closing the Dublin-Derry bus route altogether?

Now I admit that I haven't taken it for a while and when I did so in recent years the bus tended to be full until the stop at Monaghan after which it emptied out considerably (northbound).

But closing down an entire route between two major cities would seem to be ridiculous. Yes, in theory you can get the train from Dublin to Belfast and change for the local train link to Derry and yes, the view as you come out of the tunnel at Castle Rock over Lough Foyle when approaching Derry is spectacular but by God it is SLO-O-O-O-W.

One thing I found was that the drivers on the Dublin Derry route were often arseholes. Refusing to let you take a small bag into the cabin, even when I said it contained a laptop and that I was unwilling to entrust it to the hold. And even when the bus was almost empty!! Not the sort of thing to encourage passenger numbers. (OK it was mainly the ONE guy but he did seem to drive the route a lot)

I know somebody who complained to CIE about this and was given a load of old bumph about "company policy" and "safety and convenience to our customers" etc etc. She drives to Derry now.

Are there private bus operators on the Dublin Derry route? Never know when I might need one.

devnull

Snickers Man wrote: »

Are they seriously thinking of closing the Dublin-Derry bus route altogether?

The Derry Route is operated in conjunction with Translink who provide the majority of services on the route. Bus Eireann only provide 4 of the 12 daily services between Dublin and Derry

http://buseireann.ie/timetables/1470909505-33.pdf

I would say it is likely that Translink would step in and take over the services from Bus Eireann. The Translink operated services are under no threat whatsoever and Translinks costs are said to be cheaper than Bus Eireann so they could perhaps make it pay where BE couldn't.

Are there private bus operators on the Dublin Derry route? Never know when I might need one.

One private was going to start a Dublin to Derry route a couple of years ago but did not because of the fact that as its nature is a cross border service, there would be no protection from predatory behavior from incumbents since as the route is an international route, it is outside the regulative powers of both the Irish and Northern Irish Government.

So the operator did not see the investment worthwhile, because the moment they started service the competition could in theory start running buses just in front of them at an unsustainable frequency at a very low and unsustainable price to run the competitors off the road.

This is why we have a regulated commercial sector in the Republic of Ireland, to prevent this kind of behaviour.

Snickers Man

devnull wrote: »

The Derry Route is operated in conjunction with Translink who provide the majority of services on the route. Bus Eireann only provide 4 of the 12 daily services between Dublin and Derry

http://buseireann.ie/timetables/1470909505-33.pdf

I would say it is likely that Translink would step in and take over the services from Bus Eireann.

Thanks for clearing that up. The devil is in the detail for the uninitiated!

devnull

Snickers Man wrote: »

Thanks for clearing that up. The devil is in the detail for the uninitiated!

Despite the fact three routes look quite a lot, really in reality I can't see there being a huge amount of problems for most travelers on the 33 and the X7 since there either is already alternatives or there almost certainly will be. The 21 could be interesting though.

Route 33: Derry to Dublin
- 2 Northbound & 2 Southbound
- Translink operate another 4 in each direction
- Translink most likely to add services

Route X7: Clonmel to DUblin
- JJ Kavanagh offers a route that stops in more villages than Bus Eireann
- JJ Kavanagh also serves all of the places that X7 does
- Dublin Coach also offers a service between Dublin and Kilkenny
- Possible that JJK will up their frequency.

Route 21: Westport to Athlone
The 21 is the one that could be more interesting, that is basically only running twice a day in each direction: http://www.buseireann.ie/timetables/1475574472-21.pdf (very complicated looking timetable)

Personally I think routes like the 21 with a timetable like that, since they are not in competition with any private operator then I think the sensible thing here is to put out a tender for a new PSO route, since really that is a PSO route. That kind of route should be funded by taxpayers.

n97 mini

FF lad on the radio saying the only way out is more taxpayer money, by effectively making Expressway routes into PSO routes.

n97 mini

devnull wrote: »

Despite the fact three routes look quite a lot, really in reality I can't see there being a huge amount of problems for most travelers on the 33 and the X7 since there either is already alternatives or there almost certainly will be. The 21 could be interesting though.

Route 33: Derry to Dublin
- 2 Northbound & 2 Southbound
- Translink operate another 4 in each direction
- Translink most likely to add services

Route X7: Clonmel to DUblin
- JJ Kavanagh offers a route that stops in more villages than Bus Eireann
- JJ Kavanagh also serves all of the places that X7 does
- Dublin Coach also offers a service between Dublin and Kilkenny
- Possible that JJK will up their frequency.

Route 21: Westport to Athlone
The 21 is the one that could be more interesting, that is basically only running twice a day in each direction: http://www.buseireann.ie/timetables/1475574472-21.pdf (very complicated looking timetable)

Personally I think routes like the 21 with a timetable like that, since they are not in competition with any private operator then I think the sensible thing here is to put out a tender for a new PSO route, since really that is a PSO route. That kind of route should be funded by taxpayers.

There's already a PSO route funded largely by the taxpayer between Westport and Athlone bus station: the train. Daft having subsidised services competing for business from each other.

n97 mini

n97 mini wrote: »

FF lad on the radio saying the only way out is more taxpayer money, by effectively making Expressway routes into PSO routes.

Let's hope the government doesn't collapse before May so!

Infini

gbob wrote: »

Tired of listening to claims of excessive pay for doing next to no work..

I'm a senior driver at BE, my daily driving time is 8 hours for which I get paid 8hrs 40mins. I work extremely unsociable hours and every Saturday for which I receive zero additional compensation. My salary is 39k inclusive.

I, like most of the rest of this country have been subjected to the increasing cost of living and reduced income over the last several years and I can't afford another attack on my income.

I won't pretend to have the answers to solve this crisis, but I will say this crisis is in my opinion manufactured in order to introduce to "low cost model".

Many of the routes that BE provide are incorrectly described as express when they are in fact glorified PSO services which should be reclassified and funded accordingly.

BE should however, completely abandon the express market and concentrate purely on the PSO routes which was the very reason for their creation.

BE is poorly managed, underfunded, wasteful, top heavy, and definitely needs streamlining, but not at my expense.

Honestly I feel for you man, some of the posters on here are going on about greed and overpaid crap but to be honest no matter what they say in the end this is just a board, theres no debate or reasoning people are just polarised in their positions and wont budge.

Realistically I'm not uncompromising, when it comes to strikes my honest position is let people at it and wait and see. The problem I find here is some seem to WANT to see people lose their jobs and call others greedy when they never worked a day of their lives in the place and know nothing about the jobs involved and thats what really irritates me personally.

This whole crap about market rates is also a load of bollockology as well. Only have to look at how "market rates" have been the excuse over the last decade or more to see how wages in general stagnated while costs and taxes went up. Where as our parents generation managed to raise at least 2 or more kids and pay a morgage with only the father working now both parents have to work to afford a decent standard of living.

If the company's inefficient as well the best ways of solving these issues is through getting people to talk and keep talking. Simply brushing off one side and ramming through an agenda by one side is what causes strikes in the first place. Lets us remember that most of the problems at all 3 companies over the years have been at MANAGEMENT level not staff level. Simply looking for excuses to blame staff and try and cut their wages cos its "above market rate" is just hyperbole: It's honestly imo just people looking for an excuse to put people down cos they got better wages than them nothing more and nothing less.

joeysoap

Snickers Man wrote: »

,......

Refusing to let you take a small bag into the cabin, even when I said it contained a laptop and that I was unwilling to entrust it to the hold. And even when the bus was almost empty!! Not the sort of thing to encourage passenger numbers.

Seems to be hit and miss policy on this. A small bag containing iPad and other valuables and was told to place it in the hold. I informed the driver that 1) it fitted into the over head space 2) I would keep it on my knee, but he insisted. Expressway bus pulls into a very busy bus station where there is usually a large turnover of passengers and you are hoping that honesty prevails. You can see nothing from the bus when the door is open.It would put me off to be honest. Other drivers passed no heed of the same bag.

devnull

n97 mini wrote: »

FF lad on the radio saying the only way out is more taxpayer money, by effectively making Expressway routes into PSO routes.

Essentially saying that the needs of employees of Bus Eireann and the unions should be put above a properly functioning public transport system that serves the needs of the public and allows innovation to do that and give the people what they want rather than BE dictating what they are going to get.

It would be the subject of many legal challenges as well.

devnull

n97 mini wrote: »

There's already a PSO route funded largely by the taxpayer between Westport and Athlone bus station: the train. Daft having subsidised services competing for business from each other.

But the thing is, does the train call at all the small villages en-route? Not everyone is going from end to end and we need to think about the rural places as well and making sure they have some kind of connection.

end of the road

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

There's the problem, same as the HSE.

why should he pay for the incompetents of management? he didn't cause the mess.

ThisRegard wrote: »

A hell of a lot of private sector workers are either been shown the door, pay freezes, pay cuts or had to change their practices on a daily basis when their company hits a rough patch.

they should have joined a union. people should join a union and be active in that union. the union is what the members make it.

devnull wrote: »

The regulator has said this on a number of occasions and is now at the stage where the CEO is having to write to newspaper editors and people in the media and figures who continue to state this won't happen to correct their misinformation.

really? so before hand what was she doing? allowing the misinformation to go unchallenged and uncorrected?

devnull

Infini2 wrote: »

Realistically I'm not uncompromising, when it comes to strikes my honest position is let people at it and wait and see. The problem I find here is some seem to WANT to see people lose their jobs and call others greedy.

Nobody wants people to lose their jobs, they just want to see a decent public transport service provided using taxpayers money in a way which is deemed efficient. Currently that is not the case. If it was I think most people would have no problem with increased funding.

Which basically says:
Everyone is bitter - BUT NOT US

This whole crap about market rates is also a load of bollockology as well. Only have to look at how "market rates" have been the excuse over the last decade or more to see how wages in general stagnated while costs and taxes went up. Where as our parents generation managed to raise at least 2 or more kids and pay a morgage with only the father working now both parents have to work to afford a decent standard of living.

Times have changed my friend, the world never stands still, there are some things I don't like now compared to my childhood but at the end of the day rather than having a chip on my shoulder about it I accept that times change and that you have to adapt to them.

The irony if your post is that you are moaning about taxes going up yet at the same time you have spent the last few pages of this thread arguing why the taxpayer should give your company more taxes. You have successfully managed to show the hypocrisy of your own argument.

Which basically says:
Everyone must pay - BUT NOT US

Lets us remember that most of the problems at all 3 companies over the years have been at MANAGEMENT level not staff level. Simply looking for excuses to blame staff and try and cut their wages cos its "above market rate" is just hyperbole

It's honestly imo just people looking for an excuse to put people down cos they got better wages than them nothing more and nothing less.

If drivers are being paid for 9.5 hours a day and spending only 5.5 hours a day driving then that is a problem with the rosters that means the staff are not delivering a cost effective service for your employer and this is inefficient, it is in the interests of the taxpayer that such rotas are eliminated and replaced with ones which give maximum performance from the employees to the employer.

Second time in as many paragraphs you have successfully managed to show the hypocrisy of your own argument. On one hand yoiu are claiming that people who are on less than you are blaming you down because you happen to earn more than them, but in the space of the breath you are blaming people who earn more than you and resorting to the same claims which you claim to disagree with.

Which basically says:
Everyone earning less than another group of people is bitter because of it - BUT NOT US

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

why should he pay for the incompetents of management? he didn't cause the mess.

Everyone has a part to play, management are also subject to cut as well.

Nobody is fully to blame and nobody is blameless.

they should have joined a union. people should join a union and be active in that union. the union is what the members make it.

In the private sector, if a company does not have enough money to pay and the union does not accept cuts and goes out on strike and the company runs out of money, everybody loses their job, this is very different to the public sector who can use the taxpayer as a weapon to bail them out.

I will once again tell you the story of a private sector business I worked in where one department went out on strike and all lost their jobs and were made redundant since that division of the company became insolvent, whereas mine we took some cuts and our jobs were saved because of it.

The unions representing the group who were laid off were told on 5 occasions they had to do a deal right now or they would lose their job. A few days later they lost their jobs.

really? so before hand what was she doing? allowing the misinformation to go unchallenged and uncorrected?

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/letter-editor-irish-examiner-anne-graham-ceo-national-transport-authority/

The problem is that in this country some of the media do not see fit to allow both sides of stories to comment on them, they believe what they are spoon fed without even challenging what they are told. If the union makes some allegations against the NTA the NTA should have a right of reply, but instead what we have is the unions saying something, it being posted as fact which scares people who are vulnerable even though there is no reason to be scared.

Anne Graham shouldn't have to write these letters because the media should properly research and put these questions to her as part of their research and creation of their article, but they don't and people only get one side of the story.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

Nobody wants people to lose their jobs

they do. always when there is a strike people want those on strike to lose their jobs for daring to look for something. granted they seem to be back in their box compared to when the private sector workers at luas went out.

devnull wrote: »

The problem is that in this country some of the media do not see fit to allow both sides of stories to comment on them, they believe what they are spoon fed without even challenging what they are told. If the union makes some allegations against the NTA the NTA should have a right of reply, but instead what we have is the unions saying something, it being posted as fact which scares people who are vulnerable even though there is no reason to be scared.

There was nothing stopping the NTA from replying. they had plenty of statements on their website. if that is not seen to be enough, then what did they do in terms of trying to get their side of the story out into the media.

devnull wrote: »

Anne Graham shouldn't have to write these letters because the media should properly research and put these questions to her as part of their research and creation of their article, but they don't and people only get one side of the story.

of course she should have to write the letters. she has to give her side of the story.

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

There was nothing stopping the NTA from replying. they had plenty of statements on their website. if that is not seen to be enough, then what did they do in terms of trying to get their side of the story out into the media. of course she should have to write the letters. she has to give her side of the story.

Proper journalistic standards involve showing both side of the story, not inviting one side for comment, presenting it as news/fact whilst completely ignoring the other side or giving them a right to reply and not putting allegations to them. People deserve to hear both sides of the story.

If I accused you of something or said you did something which you do not agree with, do you believe that it is fair if the media simply prints my accusation and just takes my word that I am saying how things are and basically implies it is correct and will not print your own view, or do you feel you should be allowed to defend yourself?

n97 mini

devnull wrote: »

But the thing is, does the train call at all the small villages en-route? Not everyone is going from end to end and we need to think about the rural places as well and making sure they have some kind of connection.

Well then close the train line!

devnull

n97 mini wrote: »

Well then close the train line!

The trouble is that as Beeching found out in the UK, if you start closing train lines because of this type of reason, this has an effect on passengers who used those lines who then used other trains, which in turns hits numbers on other lines, and makes them non viable.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

The trouble is that as Beeching found out in the UK, if you start closing train lines because of this type of reason, this has an effect on passengers who used those lines who then used other trains, which in turns hits numbers on other lines, and makes them non viable.

he also found out as did those during the later cuts, that such policies also turn those users away from public transport because the alternatives don't meet their needs and can't be made to do so. loads of the bus substitutions which replaced the lines closed during the Beeching and later cuts were withdrawn not long after or were diverted away from the route they were set up to serve because the rail users took the car instead.
anyway from my limited experience of the mayo line it seems to have quite good loadings so closing it would be moronic in the extreme.

n97 mini

devnull wrote: »

The trouble is that as Beeching found out in the UK, if you start closing train lines because of this type of reason, this has an effect on passengers who used those lines who then used other trains, which in turns hits numbers on other lines, and makes them non viable.

My comment was tongue in cheek, but it is daft to be subsidising a bus which mirrors the route of an already heavily subsidised railway. Looking at the stops on the 21 route, every second one (more or less) is in a town that already has a railway station.

I could never understand the logic of duplicating subsidised rail services with subsidised bus services. As soon as Adamstown station was built Dublin bus put on a much more frequent bus service terminating outside the door! If a private operator had done that they would be accused of trying to put IE out of business.

Infini

n97 mini wrote: »

My comment was tongue in cheek, but it is daft to be subsidising a bus which mirrors the route of an already heavily subsidised railway. Looking at the stops on the 21 route, every second one (more or less) is in a town that already has a railway station.

I could never understand the logic of duplicating subsidised rail services with subsidised bus services. As soon as Adamstown station was built Dublin bus put on a much more frequent bus service terminating outside the door! If a private operator had done that they would be accused of trying to put IE out of business.

To be honest this is somewhat a consequence of the breakup of the original CIE. The public transport sector shouldn't be competing against itself in this regard tho.

Honestly it might be better to reintegrate the 3 CIE companies back into one under control of the NTA, jettison the useless parts of management and start over with a slimmer management system.